SCOTTISH TRACTOR TRIALS REPORT.
Page 23
Page 24
If you've noticed an error in this article please click here to report it so we can fix it.
Official Findings on .the October Demonstration—" Extraordinary Progress "Some Important Recommendations.
AT A MEETING OF the directors of the Highland and Agricultural Society held in Edinburgh on the 5th inst., the Tractor Trials Committee presented to . the Society. their report on the demonstration held in Scotland in the month of October last. The occasion evoked widespread interest, while the appearance of the official findings has been awaited with keen anticipation. While exigencies of Space preclude our publishing the report in full, a summary of the findings will doubtless be. appreciated.
It is necessary to remember that the enterprise was purely of a demonstrative and educative character— not a competitive trial—so that the findings are collective, no individual mention being made of any one machine, nor was any attempt made to arrange the machines in any order of merit. The reporting Committee comprised the following gentlemen :—Messrs. Charles Douglas, D.Sc., of .Auchlochan, Lesrnahagow-, Chairman of Directors ; G. -Bertram Shields, Del
phingstone, Tranent, Convener of Implements Committee • William Bruce, B.Sc., Edinburgh and East of Scotland College of Agriculture • George A.
Ferguson, Surradale, Elgin ; J. T. Agriculture; The
Leuchold, Dalmeny ; George Will, Crichton Royal Institution, Dumfries ; Professor R. Stanfield, Consulting Engineer; and Mr. John Stirton, Secretary Highland and Agricultural Society.
The Committee was instructed toegive special attention to the following points:—(a) Weight of mgchine, (b) mechanical design ond construction, (c) quality of work, (d) time taken andHattendance required, (e) adaptability for ploughing'different widths and depths, (f) adaptability, to various kinds of work, such as cultivating, harvesting, road haulage, and the like, (g) ease and safety of handling, (h) .ease of turning, space and time required for same, and uniforthity of furrow ends in ploughing, (i) facility and efficiency of attachment of tractor to plough and other farm implements, (j) price.
Exhibitors were left as free as possible to demontrate the capabilities •of their machines in the manner they considered most suitable. No restrictions were imposed as to the plough to be used, the number of furrows taken, or the speed of the tractor. The depth of ploughing was, however, prescribed, and varied at
the different centres from 6 ins. to 8 ins, for lea, and from 7 ins. to 9 ins. for stubble. Any machine which failed to plough to the required depth, or which was unable to perform the work to the satisfaction of the Stewards and Committee, was prevented from proceeding until the fault had been remedied.
Twenty-nine tractors took .part in the demonstration. The number of ploughs was considerably greater, as several tractor exhibitors sent more than one plough, and a number of plough makers entered ploughs independently.
Of the 29 machines which took part 15 ran on four wheels, six belonged to the three-wheeled type, four were fitted with chain tracks, while four were singleunit machines (one with caterpillar). Eleven agrimotors demanded the services of two men, while 18 were one-man machines. Of the total, 25 used paraffin, and three ran on petrol, while one was a steamer. The weight of the agrimotors participating in the demonstration ranged from 30 to 80 cwt. So far as the weight factor is concerned the Committee point' out that—" In many eases the tractors. shown have been evolved on the lines of the heavy steam tractor. The ,most noteworthy feature of the present demonstration was the appearance of the light land tractor constructed on new lines. Several menuiakturers appear to have departed from the idea that great weight is necessary for a tractor to do efficient work on the land. It was clearly shown at the demonstration that light machines, adequately provided. with . spuds, grip the ground. and perform the work better than the heavier machines. Every drawback, such as slipping in soft land and inability to climb gradients, was aggravated by increase of weight abeve a, certain limit. The light tractor ;13 quite suitable, not only for ploughing, but for other farming operations, and therefore embraces all the usual requirements of a farm tractor, including the driving of a threshing-mill and other far& machinery." The Committee advance the opinion that all things considered the tractor need not exceed ;30 cwt. in weight., and that field „and road work are more or less incompatible to the one unit.
So far as horse-power is concerned the Committee maintain the desirability of a substantial reserve of power. Unfavourable weather conditions contribute to waste of power. Consequently 20 b.h.p. is set down as the minimum. The agrimotor, it is pointed out, should be capable of drawing "two full furrows under the worst_conditions and three furrows under favourable conditions."
The caterpillar v. wheels controversy is raised, and the Committee's findings will doubtless add fuel to the flames. It remarks "the caterpillar machine has not been shown to have any advantage in gripping power over the best type of wheel machine, and when it has to encounter a stiff gradient on greasy land it is very liable to slip." On the other hand, so far as wheel attachments are concerned, while spikes and bars are criticised adversely, a, stout spud 3 ins. to 4 ins, in width, and from 4 ins. to 5 ins, in length, is declared to appear "to be the most satisfactory, especially when these spuds are so arranged, in relation to the chgcumferente of the wheel, that the full gripping power of one spud, or its equivalent, is always in operation." • • The points of accessibility,pvoteetion, brakes; ,reliability, and durability are dealt with. Two 'elects which-are Claimed, to affect durability are specified= the exposed gear drives on some of the wheel tractors, which fill with mud and grit, and the excessive Wear associated with the caterpillar arra.ngement."
The' absence of an efficient safety deyice for minimizirig -shocks when the plough is brought into conflict with-an obstruction occasions criticism., and useful recommendations are advanced, the Committee suggesting that " this attachment should be an integral part of the tractor, and not merely a casual device inserted in: the draught connections." Attention is also drawn to the necessity of shifting the attachment of the plough to the tractor in a vertical as well as 'a horizontal direction.
. So far as speeds are concerned, the Committee remark; " for consistent geed work in ploughing—mowing and reaping are also included—any speed exceeding 2-i or 3' miles 'an hour is excessivel though "for spring cultivation a higher' speed iS desirable." Consequently the suggested speeds are set 'down at 2i
and 4 miles per hour. .
The fuel issue is dealt with, the Committee advancing illopinion that the carburetters on many of the tractors were not capable of thoroughly and coin pletely vaporizing paraffin," and that owing to haul age power thus being seriously impaired "it may be found, when normal conditions return, more satisfactory t,o use petrol rather than paraffin as being more efficient, even although the price he somewhat higher.'1 The ploughs, in view of the fact that they play the vital role in ploughing' operations, excite considerable comment. The unsuitability of the foreign ploughs to work in this -country is emphasized. Other points of significance to power farmers are dealt With, including the 'automatic lift, the salient defect of which—inability to be lifted when stationary —did not fail to arouse attention: 'Suggestions for future development in this line are laid down.
The question of price is also dealt with, and the Committee remark that " manufacturers should aim at putting a tractor on the market at a price net' exCeeditig 2400."
G'eneralfy -considered, the report is terse and in
j formative, judgment being .passed in a severely Partial spirit. Many of the findings—it must be noted that the subject is treated from the Scottish point Of 'view only—are applicable 'to other parts of the country, and, we think, 'they will generally be accepted.' The Committee, in conclusion, remark that 'the result of, the deinonstration has been to show that extraordinary progress has been` made ithin the • past two years, and for this advance great credit is due to agricultural engineers and manufacturers." AGRIMOT.